AMES, IOWA — IowaStateUniversity researchers are putting flu vaccines into the genetic makeup of corn, which may someday allow pigs and humans to get a flu vaccination simply by eating corn or corn products.

"We're trying to figure out which genes from the swine influenza virus to incorporate into corn so those genes, when expressed, would produce protein," said Hank Harris, professor in animal science and one of the researchers on the project. "When the pig consumes that corn, it would serve as a vaccine."

Russia said in mid-November that technical issues would prevent its engineers from starting up the reactor at Bushehr by the end of the year as previously planned.

Moscow, which is under Western pressure to distance itself from Tehran over its nuclear activities, stressed at the time that politics had nothing to do with the decision.

Webmaster's Commentary:

The "window" in which the Israeli military might think it could launch an attack against Iran would be before Russian engineers start up the reactor, and before Russia delivers their S-300 anti-aircraft system. As reported on Friday, 27 Nov at:http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=112314&sectionid=351020101

"Russia 'will' deliver S-300 to Iran in 2 months"

""The delivery deadline has already passed, but the Russian side has cited technical problems which it said it was working on to fix," Sajjadi added. "We feel that this question will be resolved within one to two months.

If there is going to be an attack against Iran, look for an immediate, massive build-up by corporate media here and abroad to demonize Iran in any way they think they can, starting this next week.

And if Israel attacks, you can bet one worthless US dollar that the US will be dragged into the fray somehow.

Five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have now joined forces against Iran. China and Russia had previously resisted taking action against Iran have now joined forces with Britain, France, Germany and the United States.

This looks so much like the build up to the invasion of Iraq with harder sanctions on the horizon and followed with what could inevitably be military action.

Doesn't it appear strange that we also saw this same build up in Pakistan and India with the US spearheading pressure to stop both those nations from gaining Nuclear Weapons? What gives these elite five the right to dictate what another country should or should not do and yet is continues to turn a blind eye on the Israeli Nuclear Programme that already has its own nuclear arsenal.

The Jerusalem Post reported on 22 November that the chairman of NATO's Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, visited Israel earlier this week to study "IDF tactics and methods that the military alliance can utilise for its war in Afghanistan".

I would advise both the Israeli official and Admiral Di Paola to slightly curb their enthusiasm. The Israeli army didn't win a single war since 1967. Yes, it murdered many civilians, it flattened many cities, it starved millions, it has been committing war crimes on a daily basis for decades, and yet it didn't win a war. Thus the IDF cannot really teach NATO how to win in Afghanistan.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Any vertical integration between the IDF and NATO will not auger well for any prospects of peace in this world.

The apparent bottom line in a paper published in the South African Journal of Science is that South Africa's gold industry is on final deathwatch, despite claims of massive existing below-ground reserves. Chris Hartnady, research and technical director of Cape Town earth sciences consultancy Umvoto Africa, has found that South Africa's Witwatersrand goldfields are around 95% exhausted, and anticipates that production rates should fall permanently below 100 tonnes a year within the coming decade.

And as for the most stinging critique of Bernanke's attempt to force the US taxpayer to become the only holder of MBS in the world, the first deputy chairman of Russia's Central Bank had this to say of just how much credibility the rest of the world has in the Fed's balance sheet (which now soon will consist almost 50% of MBS and Agencies).

Ulyukayev also said the central bank had no plans to invest again in U.S. mortgage agency bonds.

In this video the financial imbeciles from Tech Ticker talk about a recent statement from China’s premier Wen Jiabao. Earlier today Jiabao sent a shot across the dollar’s bow by stating that the U.S. government must get its financial house in order to assure that its currency remains stable. The statement from Jiabao was a significant blow to the dollar which led to gold breaking $1,100 an ounce...

Nowadays, Brussels is celebrating the signing and ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, which has been long awaited. This treaty simplifies and consolidates the older treaties and also reforms a number of administrative issues related to voting and other aspects. However, most importantly this Treaty introduces a key post which is that of the President of the European Council.

President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel met in Paris to discuss this issue and agreed to support Mr. Blair to run for the EU presidency. Although Sarkozy and Merkel withdrew diplomatically from their previous full support to the British candidate, Blair remains one of the strong candidates for the post given the intensive support he is getting from the U.K.

The former head of the West German Military Intelligence has issued a book revealing secret details of a 1949 US-German treaty, alleging America and its allies have been deliberately suppressing the nation’s sovereignty.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Ernst Zundel has been denounced as crazy for saying that Germany is not a legal sovereign state, that the United States maintains illegal control over the nation. Now, the former head of German intelligence corroborates EXACTLY what Zundel has been saying for years!

The US government cannot make secret agreements with other nations, it is illegal and unconstitutional. Thus, Germany is not legally required to allow the United States government to control it, and can just cast aside the provisions of the secret agreement made under duress in the years following WWII.

Strange coincidencesPrescott Bush, banker to the Nazis and grandfather of George W. Bush, sponsored the rise of an obscure California right-wing politician who socialized extensively with Nazi sympathizers: Richard M. Nixon.

Richard Nixon hired a "gofer" to assist him with his campaigning and other matters: Mob-connected Jack Ruby who later moved to Dallas.

Just days after the Kennedy assassination, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover pointedly mentioned "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" in a memo discussing the reaction of right-wing Cubans to the assassination. Two of the boats used in the infamous Bay of Pigs invasion were coincidentally named "Barbara" (the name of Bush's wife) and "Zapata" the name of his oil company.

Patients with heart disease who practised Transcendental Meditation cut their chances of a heart attack, stroke and death by half, compared with non-meditating patients, the first study of its kind has found.

Stress is a major factor in heart disease and meditation experts say the technique can help control it.

Webmaster's Commentary:

So can kicking the shit out of the government that causes the stress in the first place!

Despite news reports that the security contractor formerly known as Blackwater has seen its contracts dry up and its influence wane, the company continues to do brisk business in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and the Obama administration may be too afraid of the firm to do anything about it, says investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill.

Telling his people, "If you want peace, prepare for war," and accusing the US of secretly plotting to invade and seize Venezuela's oil reserves, Hugo Chavez announced that he intends to send 15,000 troops to his country's border with Colombia.

The hostile move, which has inflamed diplomatic relations across the region, saw the left-wing president urge his soldiers to "defend this sacred nation called Venezuela" against what he called a creeping right-wing "empire". In response, Colombia said it would complain to the United Nations.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Given the history of US intervention in the region, coupled with the recently signed agreement allowing a fairly substantial presence of US troops in Columbia, it is imminently possible that Chavez has every rational reason to be nervous.

Tensions between the countries reached a new high after the Colombian military arrested four Venezuelan soldiers, just days after Mr Chavez told his army to "prepare for war" with Colombia.

The Venezuelan ambassador to Bogota, Gustavo Marquez, said that the seriousness of the situation could not be overstated and that "there is a pre-war situation in the entire region".

Webmaster's Commentary:

This could go from a war of words to a war of bullets in a heartbeat.

And don't forget; one of the major factors in this is the treaty the US has signed with Columbia this last October, allowing for a significant number of American troops to be deployed on Columbian military bases.

Venezuela has blown up two pedestrian bridges on its border with Colombia in the latest sign of deteriorating relations between the Andean neighbours.

Soldiers destroyed the walkways because they were being used by illegal militia and drug traffickers, said Eusebio Aguero, an army general based in the border state of Táchira.

"Uniformed men, apparently from the Venezuelan army, arrived in trucks on the Venezuelan side at two pedestrian bridges that link communities on both sides and then proceeded to dynamite them," Silva said.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Venezuela's military might also have considered the bridges an excellent crossing point from which US commandos could have entered Venezuela to attempt some kind of destabilization activities against the Chavez government.

And given the rather sordid history of US intervention in South America, they could well have been correct.

The skirmish in the Yellow Sea – the first for seven years – left a North Korean patrol vessel "engulfed in flames" as it retreated back across the border under fire, according to the South Korean prime minister, Chung Un-Chan.

The clash came at a time when relations between the divided nations appeared to be thawing following increased tensions earlier this year caused by North Korea's decision to test a second nuclear device in defiance of UN sanctions.

In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained 'intimate relations' with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11."

These 'intimate relations' included using Bin Laden for 'operations' in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These 'operations' involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner "as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict," that is, fighting 'enemies' via proxies.

"We urge the Israeli side to take concrete measures to restore Palestine-Israel mutual trust and create favorable conditions for the early resumption of talks between them," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said Thursday.

The remarks by China's Foreign Ministry were also echoed by the Swiss government which called on Israel to stop construction of Jewish settlements in occupied Palestinian territories.

The Quds information center has disclosed Thursday that the Israeli occupation authorities have prepared the blueprints for seven settlement projects in the occupied city of Jerusalem as part of its efforts to judaize the Palestinian city.

In a statement it issued and published by the Quds Press, the center pointed out that the new suburb that the IOA announced it would construct in Israeli settlement of Gilo was indeed a prelude for seven bigger settlement projects the IAO wants to build in the occupied Palestinian city.

The center also quoted sources inside the IOA as saying that the rightist government of premier Binyamin Netanyahu would carryout the projects after the diplomatic “misunderstanding” with the US administration regarding those settlements is absorbed.

The Jerusalem center for social and economic rights (JCSER) warned of Israeli intentions to deport more than 20,000 Palestinians from the West Bank who married from Jerusalemite women at the pretext that their residence in the holy city is illegal.

Ziyad Al-Hammouri, the director of the center, explained in this regard that the Israeli interior ministry published last year in a local newspaper a notice ordering what it called “the inhabitants of Judea and Samaria living in Jerusalem illegally”, in reference to the West Bank citizens who live with Jerusalemite wives in the holy city, to apply for temporary residence permits.

Israelis talk often and loudly about their desires for peace. But its never been clear precisely what peace concept it is they desire. In particular, Israeli notions of peace have never gone so far as to grant the Palestinians the same national rights that Israelis claim for themselves. Well, according to a new poll by Israeli National News (disclaimer: its a right-wing rag, sample size "more than 6,400″), a majority of Israelis are clear about what kind of "peace" they desire.

53.2% of surveyed Israelis say the "solution" to the conflict was the ethnic cleansing ("transfer") of Palestinians out of occupied Palestine and into other neighboring Arab countries. This was the most popular option among all alternatives, including the two state solution, Jordanian citizenship in the West Bank, status quo, etc. For comparative purposes, only 30.8% of Israelis support the "two-states for two peoples" framework for peace.

Keep this information in mind next to you hear Israeli hasbara about "partners for peace" or when someone tries to claim that the two-state solution is the only "realistic" solution to the conflict. If only those Palestinians would "recognize Israel’s right to exist", then everything would be SO much better.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Gee, the Jews seemed to have an entirely different opinion on ethnic cleansing ... about 65 years ago!

This is exactly what Israel did a year ago. HAMAS has stopped all rocket attacks into Israel for the duration of the 6 month cease fire. Then on November 4th, Israel attacked Gaza without provocation, launching Operation CAST LEAD.

22/11/2009

IAF strikes Gaza after Hamas declares end to rocket fire

By Haaretz Service and Reuters

Israel Air Force planes struck targets in Gaza early Sunday, wounding seven Palestinians, medical workers said, a few hours after Hamas said militant groups in the coastal strip had agreed to halt cross-border rocket fire.

An Israel Defense Forces spokesman said the strikes were in response to a rocket attack Saturday by militants in the Hamas-ruled Strip. He said they had targeted two factories in the central and northern Gaza used to make weapons and a smuggling tunnel under the border with Egypt.

Palestinian witnesses and medical workers said the targets included a metal foundry in the central Gaza Strip, a caravan in the north and smuggling tunnels in the south.

The Islamist militant organization Hamas on Saturday said it had reached an agreement with smaller armed groups in the territory to halt sporadic rocket fire against Israel, in order to prevent retaliatory attacks.

On Saturday, Palestinian militants fired a rocket into Israel from the Gaza Strip; it struck near the city of Sderot, causing no injuries or damage.

The army said in a statement: "The IDF will not tolerate any attacks by terror organizations against Israel and it's citizens."

Hamas has mostly refrained from firing rockets since January, when Israel ended a three week offensive in Gaza, Operation Cast Lead, aimed at stopping almost daily cross-border attacks.

The IDF usually responds to sporadic rocket attacks by launching air strikes against tunnels under the Egyptian border used to smuggle goods and weapons into Gaza.

Nearly 270 rockets and mortar shells were fired at Israel since the end of Operation Cast Lead on January 18, 2009, in comparison with more than3,300 rockets and mortars fired in the year before the operation.

The last month had seen approximately 15 rockets and mortar shells fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them.

GLENN: I got a letter from a woman in Arizona. She writes an open letter to our nation's leadership: I'm a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

In today's ruling, Mr Justice Michael Burton decided that: "A belief in man-made climate change, and the alleged resulting moral imperatives, is capable if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations." Under those regulations it is unlawful to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their religious or philosophical beliefs.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in an opinion piece published by The New York Times, laid out a number of benchmarks for success in the upcoming global climate talks, planned to be held in Copenhagen.

Among them, Ki-moon argued in the Tuesday edition that a “global governance structure” must be levied to ensure that nations collaborate on how resources are deployed and managed.

Writing for World Net Daily, Dr. Jerome Corsi states, “A former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government.”

1. The claim: Melting in Greenland or West Antarctica will cause sea levels to rise up to 20 feet in the near future. The truth: The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change concluded that sea levels might rise 20 feet over millennia — and it waffled on that prediction. The IPCC envisions a rise of no more than 7 inches to 23 inches by 2100. Gore’s claim is “a very disturbing misstatement of the science,” John Day, who argued the British case, says in Not Evil Just Wrong. The judge said Gore’s point “is not in line with the scientific consensus.

2. The claim: Polar bears are drowning because they have to swim farther to find ice. The truth: Justice Burton noted that the only study citing the drowning of polar bears (four of them) blamed the deaths on a storm, not ice that is melting due to manmade global warming. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, furthermore, found that the current bear population is 20,000-25,000, up from 5,000-10,000 in the 1950s and 1960s. Day says in Not Evil Just Wrong that the appeal to polar bears is “a very clever piece of manipulation.”

3. The claim: Global warming spawned Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The truth: “It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that,” Burton wrote in his ruling. A May 2007 piece in New Scientist refuted the Katrina argument as a “climate myth” because it’s impossible to tie any single weather event to global warming.

4. The claim: Increases in temperature are the result of increases in carbon dioxide. The truth: Burton questioned the two graphs Gore used in An Inconvenient Truth. Gore argued that there is “an exact fit” between temperature and CO2, Burton said, but his graphs didn’t support that conclusion. Recent data also do not support it: The global temperature has been declining for about a decade, even as CO2 levels continue rising.

5. The claim: The snow on Mount Kilimanjaro is melting because of global warming. The truth: The melting has been under way for more than a century — long before SUVs and jumbo jets — and appears to be the result of other causes. Justice Burton noted that scientists agree the melting can’t be blamed primarily on “human-induced climate change.”

6. The claim: Lake Chad is disappearing because of global warming. The truth: Lake Chad is losing water, and humans are contributing to the losses. But the humans in the lake’s immediate vicinity, rather than mankind as a whole using fossil fuels, are to blame. Burton cited factors like population, overgrazing and regional climate variability.

7. The claim: People are being forced to evacuate low-lying Pacific atolls, islands of coral that surround lagoons, because of encroaching ocean waters. The truth: By their very nature, atolls are susceptible to rising sea levels. But Burton said pointedly in his ruling, “There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened.”

8. The claim: Coral reefs are bleaching and putting fish in jeopardy. The truth: In his ruling, Burton emphasized the IPCC’s finding that bleaching could kill coral reefs — if they don’t adapt. A report released this year shows that reefs already are thriving in waters as hot as some people say ocean waters will be 100 years from now. Burton also said it is difficult to separate coral stresses such as over-fishing from any changes in climate.

9. The claim: Global warming could stop the “ocean conveyor,” triggering another ice age in Western Europe. The truth: Once again, Gore’s allies at the IPCC disagree with that argument. Burton cited the panel in concluding that “it is very unlikely that the ocean conveyor … will shut down in the future.” The fact that the scientific understanding of how the conveyor belt works remains unsettled further exposes the flaw in Gore’s claim.

Even Drayson is outbid, however, by the groupies in The Guardian, who now suggest that people like Christopher Booker should no longer be compared to "Holocaust deniers" but consigned to even more outer darkness by branding them as climate "Creationists", the dirtiest word they know. Meanwhile at the University of the West of England in Bristol this weekend, a conference of "eco-psychologists", led by a professor, are solemnly exploring the notion that "climate change denial" should be classified as a form of "mental disorder".

The idea that ‘climate change denial’ is a psychological disorder – the product of a spiteful, wilful or simply in-built neural inability to face up to the catastrophe of global warming – is becoming more and more popular amongst green-leaning activists and academics. And nothing better sums up the elitism and authoritarianism of the environmentalist lobby than its psychologisation of dissent. The labelling of any criticism of the politics of global warming, first as ‘denial’, and now as evidence of mass psychological instability, is an attempt to write off all critics and sceptics as deranged, and to lay the ground for inevitable authoritarian solutions to the problem of climate change.

It is billed as the largest ever gathering of climate change deniers, a convention that kicked off last night with a title suggesting global warming is a thing of the past, and a guest list that includes a hurricane forecaster, a retired astronaut and a sitting European president.

UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at a high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington. Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.

“The House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”

Webmaster's Commentary:

This pretty much proves that Human-Caused Global Warming is a political agenda and not science.

At the cap-and-trade hearings, it was revealed that not everyone will suffer from this growth-killing energy tax. A congresswoman wanted to know why sea levels aren't rising but Gore's bank account is.

When Gore left office in January 2001, he was said to have a net worth in the neighborhood of $2 million. A mere eight years later, estimates are that he is now worth about $100 million. It seems it's easy being green, at least for some.

Gore has his lectures and speeches, his books, a hit movie and Oscar, and a Nobel Prize. But Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., was curious about how a man dedicated to saving the planet could get so wealthy so quickly.

In addition to the expansion of the African Union and the population reduction goals that Estulin has identified as key G20 talking points, the documents also shed light on how the financial oligarchs hope to establish a global fund of "predictable public finance" to fight the phoney global warming problem. Startlingly, the draft document admits that the fund could be administered by "an existing international financial institution." Although this potentially explosive language was removed from the bland, politically palatable final version of the G20 communique, attendee notes indicate the nature and operation of this fund was a key discussion point during the conference.

Obama Years Ago Helped Fund Carbon Program He Is Now Pushing Through Congress is a FOXNews story by Ed Barnes. In short, While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he is now trying to push through Congress as president.

The charity was the Joyce Foundation on whose board of directors Obama served and which gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were “instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”

For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as “the world’s first and North America’s only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil.”

Gore, self-proclaimed Patron Saint of the Environment, buys his carbon off-sets from himself--the Generation Investment Management LLP, “an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C., of which he is both chairman and founding partner. The Generation Investment Management business has considerable influence over the major carbon credit trading firms that currently exist, including the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Strong, the silent partner, is a man whose name often draws a blank on the Washington cocktail circuit. Even though a former Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the much hyped Rio Earth Summit) and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations in the days of an Oil-for-Food beleaguered Kofi Annan, the Canadian born Strong is little known in the United States. That’s because he spends most of his time in China where he he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the failing Kyoto Protocol.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Read this one carefully all the way through, and you will see what I have been telling you all along. This "human caused global warming" crisis is a gigantic scam to make the insiders rich selling you a total fantasy.

There was a large dose of whimsy in the G8 leaders getting together in Berlusconi's Italy last week. Not only did it place the host's colourful private life at the centre of the world's stage but it was further enlivened by the world leaders' decision to adopt targets for emission levels 40 years into the future.

As a target date 2050 is ludicrously beyond the life expectancies of all the leaders adopting it, none would be held responsible for its failure.

Even as the U.S. Senate and the Group of 8 nations meeting in Italy continue their endless jabbering about greenhouse gases, nature is not cooperating.

The global climate has entered a phase of cooling and reduced solar activity, which some experts believe could bring on serious crop failures and food shortages. The serious fear now is that the continued low activity of the Sun forebodes an extended period of cooling, perhaps enough to bring on another Little Ice Age. Anyone who is not addressing that reality is blowing bubbles in the wind.

Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee put their cap and trade global warming bill–that would increase U.S. energy prices, including electricity bills–on the fast track Monday. Republicans, meanwhile, are complaining that the expedited process is designed to avoid well-informed public debate about what the bill will do and its consequences for American consumers.

Waxman, in a memo sent Sunday, told members that he wanted the bill out of committee by Thursday, allowing only four days to debate a 1,000-page bill which would mean higher energy prices and a reduction in income for 80 percent of Americans, according to a May 7 Congressional Budget Office report.

“Last night at 3:09 a.m., House Democrats filed a 309-page amendment and denied Republican and Democrat amendments to the tune of the 224 that were submitted,” complained Republican Mike Pence of Indiana during the day’s three-hour debate. “What’s the hurry?”

The hurry is the ambitious Obama administration goal of passing climate legislation before global climate talks in Copenhagen in December.

If passed by the Senate, the American Clean Energy and Security Act would create a cap-and-trade program to reduce climate warming emissions.

Webmaster's Commentary:

One of the last major pieces of legislation passed by a congress which never actually read the document was the US Patriot Act.

And we know just how much of a body blow to the Constitution and Bill of Rights that was.

This is a complete fraud, and will do nothing to actually help the environment.

It will, with what will be essentially a surcharge on energy you use, make certain individuals more filthy rich than they already are.

For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as “the world’s first and North America’s only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil.”

Gore, self-proclaimed Patron Saint of the Environment, buys his carbon off-sets from himself–the Generation Investment Management LLP, “an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C., of which he is both chairman and founding partner. The Generation Investment Management business has considerable influence over the major carbon credit trading firms that currently exist, including the Chicago Climate Exchange."

House Democrats narrowly won a key test vote Friday on sweeping legislation to combat global warming and usher in a new era of cleaner energy. Republicans said the bill included "the largest tax increase in American history."

Webmaster's Commentary:

The ship of state is sinking, and Congress chops a larger hole in the bottom of the hull.

President Obama today proposed tough standards for tailpipe emissions from new automobiles, establishing the first nationwide regulation for greenhouse gases.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Here is a classic example of not thinking things all the way thrugh.

1. The US Government just handed hundreds of billions of your tax dollarsto the existing automobile manufacturers, which even before the depression were in trouble because they failed to adapt to the changing marketplace and keep pace with foreign innovation.

2. Despite the aforesaid hundreds of billions of tax dollars, GM and Chrysler still teeter on the edge of bankruptcy. The US Government has refused to make retention of US jobs a condition of financial bailouts.

3. Now that we are hundreds of billions in the hole, and no sign of actual improvement in these existing auto companies, Obama imposes new clean air standards for new cars.

4. For the same money already poured into the big three automakers to little gain, we could have financed the construction of brand new automobile plants, with American workers, using up to date methods, to produce highly efficient cars at a lower price.

Goldman Sachs and the other financial giants who brought us the economic meltdown and manipulation of the economy argue that carbon trading will solve all of our problems. If we just let them make out like bandits off of carbon trading, then everything will be fine. Not only is this an awfully convenient for the banksters who conned us into an economic crash, but many environmentalists don't even buy that carbon trading is the best way to reduce carbon emissions.

The General Electric CEO said he favored a cap-and-trade system to regulate carbon emissions versus a carbon tax.

"Look, I've said it - there's got to be a price for carbon," Immelt said. "I've come to the conclusion that cap-and-trade is the most effective way to create a market and go. There's going to be people that argue for taxes. But, I - I just think cap-and-trade is the more practical approach. But let's debate all that stuff, but let's get it done."

Webmaster's Commentary:

I keep telling you; this cap and trade system creates a product/currency out of thin air, the "carbon credit" and Enronizes it to make the brokers rich.

“Obama Years Ago Helped Fund Carbon Program He Is Now Pushing Through Congress” is a FOXNews story by Ed Barnes. In short, “While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he is now trying to push through Congress as president.”

In 2000 and 2001, while Barack Obama served as a board member for a Chicago-based charitable foundation, he helped to fund a pioneering carbon trading exchange that is likely to fill a critical role in the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme that President Obama is now trying to push rapidly through Congress.

During those two years, the Joyce Foundation gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself "North America's only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide."

You won’t find them calling it by that name, but the “New Green Deal” being proposed by the Obama administration, as well as U.N. environment agency head Achim Steiner, is nothing more than a global warming tax designed to further castrate U.S. sovereignty and geld Americans to accept increasingly centralized global regulations.

The IPCC’s own figures state that it would cost about $100 trillion to avert 1 degree Celsius of global warming through reducing CO2 emissions, even if you believe that man-made climate change is a reality.

$100 trillion dollars - that’s around $333,000 thousand dollars for every living American. Even if you apply it to every living person on the planet, it’s still around $16,000 thousand dollars each. Doesn’t sound like that would be an “unnoticed” amount does it? I would certainly notice if $16,000 left my bank account as an indulgence tax payment for my “sin” of contributing to global warming.

Webmaster's Commentary:

Those 36 underwater volcanoes near Tonga are putting out more heat per day than all the human activity on Earth in a month.

When you get those volcanoes to pay their fair share of the damages, I'll consider writing a check, but not before.

The readings at this 2-mile-high station show a troubling upward curve as the world counts down to crucial climate talks: Global warming gases are building in the atmosphere at record levels from emissions that match scientists' worst-case scenarios.

Webmaster's Commentary:

I told you; the global warming cultists are going to ramp up the hysterical fear-mongering between now and Copenhagen.

Here is the email I sent to Star Bulletin

Shame on Star-Bulletin for this obvious pandering to private interests intent on making millions of dollars “Enronizing” the Cap and Credit Carbon tax system. And I do not choose that word casually. Enron’s Ken Lay aided Al Gore in setting up the structure for Al’s company (which has invested $150 million in “selling” global warming), planning to do to the world with Carbon Dioxide what Enron did to California with electricity!

Setting aside the breaking story of the whistleblower inside the Hadley Climate Research Unit that leaked emails and documents confirming that the global warming “industry” deliberately falsified data to create a climate of fear and panic for political purposes, I would like to remind you that the measurement station at the Mauna Loa Observatory sits on top of a volcano which has been in active eruption for close to 20 years. Carbon Dioxide is emitted by volcanoes. Indeed it is the second most abundant gas in volcanic venting after water vapor (which is also a greenhouse gas).

I am insulted that you treat your readers as uneducated simpletons with little grounding in the sciences. No wonder the corporate media is in decline.

Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, and professor Michael E. Mann at PennsylvaniaStateUniversity, who has been an important scientist in the climate debate, have come under particular scrutiny. Among his e-mails, Mr. Jones talked to Mr. Mann about the "trick of adding in the real temps to each series ... to hide the decline [in temperature]."

People are talking about the emails being smoking guns but I find the remarks in the code and the code more of a smoking gun. The code is so hacked around to give predetermined results that it shows the bias of the coder. In other words make the code ignore inconvenient data to show what I want it to show. The code after a quick scan is quite a mess. Anyone with any pride would be to ashamed of to let it out public viewing.

Webmaster's Commentary:

In other words, the actual computer software used by Hadley CRU was hacked to alter the results it produces.

Although the majority of the attention around ClimateGate has focused on emails exchanged between CRU scientists, the real smoking gun proving deception and fraud can be found in the code of climate models which prove that temperature numbers were “artificially adjusted” to hide the decline in global warming since the 1960’s.

Attempts on behalf of the establishment media to characterize the scandal as “rancor” amongst scientists completely obfuscates the real issue, which is the fact that man-made climate change proponents gamed their data models to make them produce the results they wanted.

A prominent German scientist who was attacked in the leaked CRU emails by UN affiliated climate scientists has stated that the group should be barred from taking part in the peer-review process and excluded from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Hans von Storch, who is referred to in very unflattering terms several times in the leaked emails, points out that the CRU scientists acted as “gatekeepers”.

ABCNNBBCBS is simply not reporting this story, so we need to bypass them, just as we did with the Downing Street Memo. Copy off all these articles about the emails from the Hadley CRU proving intention to deceive the world on Anthropogenic Global Warming and email them to evertyone you know, then ask them to email to everyone they know, and so on.

Flood the blog-O-sphere with this story. Forward to all your friends, twitter it, facebook it, myspace it, send it to your local newspapers.

This is the story that proves large scale government conspiracies involving the entire media really do exist, and you need to force it into the public consciousness.

You are the Rangers. Do not wait for orders but grab thy keyboards and ride towards the sound of bovine excrement! :)

8.15 PM UPDATE: The Hadley University of East Anglia CRU director admits the emails seem to be genuine:

So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory - a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. I’ve been adding some of the most astonishing in updates below - emails suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. If it is as it now seems, never again will “peer review” be used to shout down sceptics.

The Department of the Treasury revealed (PDF) in September that the cap and trade scheme touted by the Obama administration would cost Americans between $100 billion and $200 billion every year -- money that would pour into government coffers. It would, of course, require extensive enforcement mechanisms in order to extract that cash.

Enforcement is also the order of the day in the UK, where government officials have begun to paw through people's trash to see what they are throwing away. Green-jacketed inspectors in Britain with the power to enter private property are checking up on CO2 production by private businesses.

In mid-August the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) disclosed that it had destroyed the raw data for its global surface temperature data set because of an alleged lack of storage space. The CRU data have been the basis for several of the major international studies that claim we face a global warming crisis. CRU's destruction of data, however, severely undercuts the credibility of those studies.

Webmaster's Commentary:

The CRU is the same unit whose leaked emails reveal collusion to block opposing points of view on the issue of anthropogenic global warming.

NASA's press office "marginalized or mischaracterized" studies on global warming between 2004 and 2006, the agency's own internal watchdog concluded. In a report released Monday [4/4/2008], NASA's inspector general office called it "inappropriate political interference" by political appointees in the press office. [PhysOrg]

Officials at Hadley, a leading global-warming research center, have apparently confirmed to an Australian publication that the documents are genuine.

The whole affair has much of the blogosphere alight. Blogs skeptical of man-made global warming see blood in the water.

Some of the old emails from scientists made public apparently make references to things like “hid[ing] the decline,” referring to global temperature series and different ways to slice and dice climate data.

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:

Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege that they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind.

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Meeting Japan's emissions-reduction target may cost households between $1,465 (£878) and $8,600 a year, according to a government-appointed task force.

The group warned that achieving the nation's stated target of cutting CO2 emissions by 25 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020 would lead to a significant fall in disposable income for households, based on the assumption that the goal would be achieved only through domestic efforts – without the purchase of carbon offsets from overseas – and that the nation's economy expands 1.3 per cent annually.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report on Monday saying that the climate change legislation being considered by Congress could reduce the purchasing power of the middle class and shrink or slow the economy.

The report, “The Costs of Reducing Greenhouse-Gas Emissions,” says market-based regulations such as a cap and trade scheme would boost the cost of emission-intensive activities. In turn, household incomes would shrink along with consumer consumption and savings, real wages would fall, the supply of labor would shrink, and economic investmen

Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege that they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind.

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

The full data – covering 1,000 emails and 3,000 documents in which the most recent document and email is dated 12 November – came to wider notice when a copy was posted on a web server in Russia on 19 November.

But a month earlier a BBC weatherman who had expressed doubts about climate change on his blog was sent a sample of the email exchanges, suggesting the hackers already had access to the private system.

... [S]ecurity experts say there are only three tenable explanations for how the server was hacked: a determined break-in by an external hacker; that one of the CRU or university systems was accidentally "compromised" by a computer virus or other "malware"; or it was an "inside job" by a disaffected member of university staff.

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

University of East Anglia Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit that fudged data in order to con people into believing Global Warming, raked in £13.7 million ($22.6 million) in grants, Frank B

Climate change data dumped

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

Related Links

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at ColoradoUniversity, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.

Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue. The lost material was used to build the databases that have been his life’s work, showing how the world has warmed by 0.8C over the past 157 years.

He and his colleagues say this temperature rise is “unequivocally” linked to greenhouse gas emissions generated by humans. Their findings are one of the main pieces of evidence used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which says global warming is a threat to humanity.

Climate email hackers had access for more than a month

Email sent to weatherman suggests hackers had access to Climatic Research Unit's systems for longer than first suspected

The full data – covering 1,000 emails and 3,000 documents in which the most recent document and email is dated 12 November – came to wider notice when a copy was posted on a web server in Russia on 19 November.

But a month earlier a BBC weatherman who had expressed doubts about climate change on his blog was sent a sample of the email exchanges, suggesting the hackers already had access to the private system.

The university declined to answer questions about the setup and security of the computers used by CRU scientists, but security experts say there are only three tenable explanations for how the server was hacked: a determined break-in by an external hacker; that one of the CRU or university systems was accidentally "compromised" by a computer virus or other "malware"; or it was an "inside job" by a disaffected member of university staff. The latter is viewed as the least likely.

Climate change deniers have seized on the disclosures, claiming they proved that the scientists had colluded to manipulate climate data and that they called into question the evidence for human-driven global warming.

Leading scientific bodies and governments have dismissed the charges, insisting there is clear evidence that humans are to blame for global warming.

The first leak occurred after 9 October, when one of the BBC's regional weathermen, Paul Hudson, wrote an article arguing that for the last 11 years there had not been an increase in global temperatures. On 12 October he was forwarded a "chain of emails", including some which subsequently appeared in the hacked documents. Last night the BBC confirmed Hudson had been forwarded emails written by two of the scientists, but refused to disclose the source.

"Paul spotted that these few e-mails were among thousands published on the internet following the alleged hacking of the UEA computer system," said a BBC spokesman.

After sending Hudson the sample, nothing more emerged from the hackers for a month. Then early on 17 November someone hacked into the RealClimate website, used by climate scientists to explain their work. Using a computer in Turkey, they uploaded a zip file containing all 4,000 emails and documents. But within a couple of minutes Gavin Schmidt, the website's co-founder, realised something was wrong and shut down the site. The file had been online for 25 minutes but had not been picked up.

On 19 November the hackers used a computer in Saudi Arabia to post a link on The Air Vent – a website popular with climate change sceptics – pointing to a fresh copy of the zip file, this time stored on a Russian web server. At that point it was finally picked up by blogs and news organisations around the world.

Detroit News: Climategate prof raked in $22.6 million in grants

University of East Anglia Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit that fudged data in order to con people into believing Global Warming, raked in £13.7 million ($22.6 million) in grants, Frank Beckmann of the Detroit News reported.

Beckmann wrote:

As Jones wrote to one-time United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author John Christy in one of his e-mails, “I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish.”

He had 22.6 million reasons to write that.

Jones, Gore and their ilk deserve to be discredited.

But they should join Americans and the world in celebrating the week that claims about manmade global warming — a kind of environmental Berlin Wall — came crashing down.

Beckman is not alone. One of the scientists connected with the IPCC — Eduardo Zorita of Germany’s Institute for Coastal Research — has dumped on Jones, Michael Mann of PennState, and the other charlatans who deliberately misled the public with their scheme.

Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.A longer answer: My voice is not very important. I belong to the climate-research infantry, publishing a few papers per year, reviewing a few manuscript per year and participating in a few research projects. I do not form part of important committees, nor I pursue a public awareness of my activities. My very minor task in the public arena was to participate as a contributing author in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC.

By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication. My area of research happens to be the climate of the past millennia, where I think I am appreciated by other climate-research ’soldiers’. And it happens that some of my mail exchange with Keith Briffa and Timothy Osborn can be found in the CRU-files made public recently on the internet.

To the question of legality or ethicalness of reading those files I will write a couple of words later.

I may confirm what has been written in other places: research in some areas of climate science has been and is full of machination, conspiracies, and collusion, as any reader can interpret from the CRU-files. They depict a realistic, I would say even harmless, picture of what the real research in the area of the climate of the past millennium has been in the last years. The scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.

Before we get too excited, Gore is not backing away from his support for the theory of man-made climate change, but his concession that carbon dioxide only accounted for 40% of warming according to new studies could seriously harm efforts to tax CO2, that evil, life-giving gas that humans exhale and plants absorb.

Webmaster's Commentary:

"Science, schmience; as long as I get to broker the carbon credits..." -- Saint Al of the Gore

A common charge leveled against global warming skeptics is that they are on the payroll of transnational oil companies, when in fact the opposite is true, oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change propaganda, emphasized recently by Exxon Mobil’s call for a global carbon tax.

Did you know, that the “Human caused Global Warming” hypothesis didn´t originate in the 1980s, but actually in the 1880s?Although, until the late 1970s, the hypothesis was considered “a curiosity”, since it contradicted observed events.

Did you further know, that at first this hypothesis wasn´t publicly promoted by scientists or even environmentalists, but by an UN ambassador and a very ambitious British Lady-politician?

So there you have it – LaSalle proposed a way of solving the CO2 issue but was basically told to shove it by Gore’s team because the methods he advocated would eliminate the need for what Gore and his cronies are really pursuing, nightmare regulation, taxation, and control over American’s lives, along with billions of dollars flooding into the coffers of Gore and the rest of the “carbon billionaire” globalists via the carbon trading systems they own.

“Could it be that Mr Gore and his team want the US economy and its free market system to be overturned regardless of the science? Could it be that they do not want to know about any science that does not allow them to tax and interfere in the lives of every American?”

My Disclaimer:

I present this information in my capacity as a human being, under Common Law, exercising my fundamental God given rights and freedoms. This information represents my private thoughts and beliefs and has been compiled and expressed for educational purposes only. In no way should it be construed as either legal or financial advice. If anyone feels a need to determine the accuracy of this information and the effectiveness of apply any of it, I strongly recommend consulting a competent expert on this subject matter.

Here's a Clue:Look the one place "They" never talk about.Look to your heart, as your competent expert lies within."Seek and you shall find."